If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

The Four Dog Defense

The Pesticide Lobbyists use a well-recognized series of lies and delaying tactics to dominate the debate in the Press and on Radio and Television. See if you recognise these techniques being used by people on this Forum.

The classic strategies are: Outright Denial; Smokescreen; Diversions; Sowing Doubt.
Of these 'sowing doubt' is by far the most common and the most effective. Entire teams of university academics are paid large sums to sow doubt in their 'science' papers, all the time, year after year.

Public Relations Specialists are also employed to fill the newspapers, TV chat shows and online forums/ Social media with a daily drip feed of Propaganda. Again, mostly sowing doubt although diversion and denial are also used. Online Forums are by far the most cost effective way to do this - you can bet your bottom dollar that there are paid professionals monitoring this Forum right now, ready to heap scorn, sarcasm and ridicule on anyone who dares to oppose the Poison industry.

Well known public figures are paid or persuaded to make public pronouncements on TV and in the Press, praising the poisoners and condemning objectors as 'hippies', 'conspiracy theorists' and 'back to the Stone Age' green idiots.

These techniques of Pyschological Warfare were perfected decades ago, when the corporations challenged the Science about the human health hazards of :

Lead,

Tobacco,

DDT

Abestos

Food additives like Aspartame, MSG, Bovine Growth Hormone etc.

PCBs

This is now a $billion dollar industry in every country; in fact, the food industry, the drug industry and the chemical industry could not function without these propaganda experts.

These underhand tactics are known as The Four Dog Defense.
The basic steps of the defence are:

At first, the company denies that its product is harmful. This usually includes attempts to discredit scientific studies, or authors of studies, that show harm while the company generate its own fake-studies designed to show no harm.

NOTE: when Bayer license neonicotinoids in 1992 they stated that it could not possibly harm bees because the neonicotinoids NEVER emerged in pollen and nectar. That was an outright lie - 96% of peer-reviewed Science studies and 10,000,000 dead bee colonies prove the lie.

Pesticide industry concedes that the chemical 'may' be 'potentially' harmful, but insists that bees are not actually exposed to it 'in the real world'.
This argument works best if only the industry carries out tests or monitors for the chemical (they do).
It works even better if you use a 1940s testing methodology, which can never reveal chronic, long term effects
Absence of data is often used to argue that there has been no toxic exposure.

NOTE: Bayer and Syngenta admit that neonics are hyper-toxic to bees, but claim that ' in the field' bees never receive a fatal dose.

The Pesticide Industry admits that people or wildlife are exposed to the poison, but denies that the exposure caused harm.
Industry concedes that the chemical is harmful, but only at very high doses.
It kills bees, or people, but only under unrealistic test conditions, but not at the lower levels or real-world scenarios to which people or wildlife are actually exposed.

They focus on differences between humans and laboratory animals, alleging that harm such as cancer seen in animal experiments is not relevant to people.

Bayer, Syngenta, Monsanto have all used this argument.
In America, the EPA and various high profile beekeepers are the main spreaders of doubt.

4. My dog bit you, and hurt you, but it wasn't my fault. DIVERSION

2178427.jpg
Industry admits the chemical is harming bees, but tries to shift the blame onto other people to avoid regulation and liability.

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Are you a paid anti-neonic advocate? Seems to be all you post about.

Are you familiar at all w/ keeping bees?

From what I've seen here these four dogs are the conspiracy theories people like to declare when they are caught w/ their pants down. Look up the Stromnessbees character here and the citations he pushes for science.

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Originally Posted by Dave Burrup

Border bee man are you anything other than a fear monger?

Ad hominem attack - shoot the messenger rather than deal with the facts.
I thought the 'rules' of this forum precluded personal attacks? Is the Moderator going to caution you about this insult?
Or is it only anyone who raises a genuine issue who gets warned to refrain from personal insults?

FYI I am a writer, broadcaster, teacher and author of books on conservation and the environment. I spent 20 years as an Environmental Educator (teacher) and Outdoor Education instructor; I have also kept bees as a hobby since 1994.

I had no problems with my bees from 1994 - 1998, I don't think I lost one hive to winter losses in that period, despite some cold winters; varroa arrived in 1998 and I treated it and controlled it with Bayer's pyrethroid strips. The bees did not die. I continued to get reasonable honey crops, even with varroa, from 1998 until around 2004 when neonics came in around here.
Since 2004 I began to lose colonies in winter and queens began to be superseded early in their first season, despite the fact that they laid good brood patterns. This reflects what has happened all over the UK in areas dominated by neonic treated canola. My bees are well looked after. They are well insulated in winter and always moved to sheltered, south facing slopes where they are protected from North, West and East winds. They are not genetically isolated and I deliberately move them to new areas where different stocks of drones are flying. I have also bought in queens from the Isle of Islay - 200 miles away in the Scottish Hebrides - an area unaffected by varroa.

I have never received a penny from any bee-campaign organisation; in fact there is no 'bee campaign organisation' with any paid staff as far as I know, neither in the UK nor in the USA.

I am old enough to have lived through four phases of the 'Pesticide Cycle' and I resent being lied to by big Chem and big AG.

They (scientists, universities, regulators, pesticide companies) told us DDT was safe from 1945 to 1989; it wasn't, it killed everything and it caused cancer. They banned it 40 years late.

In the 60s and 70s the same liars told us organochlorines (dieldrin, aldrin etc) were 'safe''; they lied, the organochlorines killed everything in the landscape; they were highly persistent in soil, water, body fat. They caused cancer. They were banned.

In the 70s through the 90s the same liars told us Organophosphates were 'safe'. They weren't. Derived from WWII Nerve Gas weapons they killed bees, insects, birds, trout, otters, frogs . . .you name it. The otter almost went extinct in the UK and is only just returning to its old rivers. Tens of thousands of sheep farmers in this country were poisoned by OPs used in sheep-dip; their lives were ruined - many developed Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinsons, early Onset Dementia - all the things which OPs were designed to create - since they were nerve gas weapons. The scientists lied, the pesticide companies lied, the regulators lied; the politicians lied - but vast profits were made. Then the truth came out - they were banned in Europe and the UK.

In the early 90s the same lying swine who gave us DDT, Organochlorines and Organophosphates - slipped neonics onto the market. They lied about their toxicity to bees - Bayer claimed they were not even toxic to bees because: 'the poison never emerges in the pollen or nectar' - that was a lie. They lied about the persistence in soil and water. they lied about sub-lethal poisoning and chronic, long term effects on colonies. The only field study ever conducted - the Cutler Dupree field study, was dismissed by the EPAs own scientists as 'not valid science'.

In the period that I have lived through, UK and European wildlife has been almost exterminated from most of our countryside. As a boy I fished for trout, sticklebacks, perch, roach, tench, pike in rivers, canals, ponds etc. All of that is gone. I lived in a big industrial town but even in the town centre we had flocks of sparrows, starlings, blackbirds; on the fringes we had skylarks, yellowhammers, linnets, black-caps - dozens of species of songbirds. Almost all of that is gone.

The same is true in America; many of you will know the writings of John Muir, Rachel Carson, Aldo Leopold - they describe the same inexorable retreat of Nature under the sustained assault of industrial farming, blanket use of pesticides, prophylactic use of pesticides - the spreading of incredibly dangerous neurotoxic poisons coast to coast, on every crop, all of the time.

Bees are just the 'canary in the coalmine' - but they happen to be 'my' bees in 'my' coalmine
I do not want to live in a countryside which is birdless, fishless, bee-less and butterfly-less. I campaign/ educate people about what is going on because I am lucky enough to have lived through a period when all that beauty still existed; it enriched our lives; it is worth fighting for.

Farming worked well for over a thousand years here in the UK without pesticides of any kind. Britain was the bread basket of the Roman Empire from AD 64 to AD 400 and after that it exported wheat and barley to the world for centuries. It is a fallacy that crops cannot be raised without pesticides. Organic farmers do it all the time. A world record yield of rice was achieved recently by an Indian farmer with no pesticides whatever- check out this article:

I am just someone who loves bees, loves Nature, loves to eat good food and drink good beer - I do not earn a penny from campaigning, I just want to be able to keep bees in a landscape which does not kill them, every year.

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Originally Posted by borderbeeman

I am just someone who loves bees, loves Nature, loves to eat good food and drink good beer - I do not earn a penny from campaigning, I just want to be able to keep bees in a landscape which does not kill them, every year.

So who are you? What is your real name? It would increase your credibility significantly to put this information forward. Where do you really live? I feel quite certain that most of the forum participants feel you are a paid lobbyist. It would enhance your message to be more forthcoming as to your real identity. Alas, I can anticipate your reply. Something to the effect that the neonics goons would come after you..... right?

Dont tell me how educated you are, tell me how much you have travelled. - The Quran

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Well, I have already told you that I live in the UK and that I am a retired teacher. This debate should not be about personalities; either people are telling the truth, backed by empirical science and real- eye-witness observation and experience - or they are selling propaganda. I truly wish someone would pay me because this takes up a lot of my time (not this forum but writing, giving interviews, making films etc) - all of which I do for the honor of resisting the chemical takeover of the world by the most poisonous corporations that have ever existed.

As I pointed out earlier, the ONLY people who stand to benefit from banning neonics are beekeepers - nobody else gives a ****. If you can show me ONE beekeeping organisation that is paying ONE person to campaign about neonics - I will be very grateful. The only legal suit brought against the EPA over the issue does feature 5 beekeepers who are suing for damages, but the case has been brought by the Centre for Food Safety. Nobody pays me one cent - I only wish they did. Still, I'll probably get a book out of it in a couple of years - not that p0ne makes money from books either - one merely gathers kudos.

Most of the people taking part here use a pseudonym for the simple reason that this Forum is just a small part of their life and they do not want the rest of their life invaded by what goes on here. Everytime I post here I am generally attacked personally by people who do not wish to debate facts, the science, the epidemiology or even the experience of beekeepers. They just attack the messenger. This is the classic 'ad hominem' strategy first noted by Aristotle.

Argumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater (e.g, "The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!"), but this is actually not that common. A more typical manifestation of argumentum ad hominem is attacking a source of information -- for example, responding to a quotation from Richard Nixon on the subject of free trade with China by saying, "We all know Nixon was a liar and a cheat, so why should we believe anything he says?" Argumentum ad hominem also occurs when someone's arguments are discounted merely because they stand to benefit from the policy they advocate -- such as Bill Gates arguing against antitrust, rich people arguing for lower taxes, white people arguing against affirmative ethnic action, ethnic minorities arguing for affirmative action, etc. In all of these cases, the relevant question is "not who makes the argument", but whether the argument is valid.

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

PLEASE NOTE THE RULES YOU AGREED TO WHEN YOU SIGNED UP TO THIS FORUMDoes the Moderator actually enforce these rules?

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the Beesource Beekeeping Forums to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree to be civil and "observe with both friend and foe the ordinary rules of courtesy." You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by BeeSource.com.

Be civil. Personal attacks are never okay. We can disagree and debate a subject, which is fine. You'll find no "know-it-all's" here. No one on this forum is in a position where they can't be questioned or disagreed with in a civil manner.

Unfortunately, we share a common first name, Graham, but other than that we have no connection.

PLEASE NOTE THE RULES YOU AGREED TO WHEN YOU SIGNED UP TO THIS FORUM
Does the Moderator actually enforce these rules?

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the Beesource Beekeeping Forums to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree to be civil and "observe with both friend and foe the ordinary rules of courtesy." You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by BeeSource.com.

Be civil. Personal attacks are never okay. We can disagree and debate a subject, which is fine. You'll find no "know-it-all's" here. No one on this forum is in a position where they can't be questioned or disagreed with in a civil manner.

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

According to info he posted in May 2012 on another Beekeeping site, Borderbeeman lives in "the Scottish Borders - Coldstream, on the river Tweed". You can read the rest here:(deleted)

More on Coldstream, Scotland here:
(deleted)

Unfortunately, we share a common first name, Graham, but other than that we have no connection.

I haven't been here for a while, but once upon a time there was a decent level of debate. Now - here, at least - it seems to have degenerated into unwarranted, personal attacks with no serious discussion of the real issues.

What has a contributor's location, occupation or interests to do with you? And what have they to do with his cogent and incisive post about the obnoxious behaviour of corporations?

Unless you want someone poking around in your private life, I suggest discussing the argument, not the person.

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Regarding Beesource rules, I simply linked to information Borderbeeman posted elsewhere on the internet. If he finds that information offensive or defamatory, one has to wonder why he posted it on the net in the first place!

If you post information on a public forum, it is foolish to expect that Google won't find it!

UPDATE: I see that Borderbeeman has gone back and edited his original post at Biobees to remove certain information. Anyone familiar with the expression about "closing the barn door after the horses have left"? Apparently he is not familiar with "archive.org", whose mission is to archive everything on the net.

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Originally Posted by Rader Sidetrack

Regarding Beesource rules, I simply linked to information Borderbeeman posted elsewhere on the internet. If he finds that information offensive or defamatory, one has to wonder why he posted it on the net in the first place!

If you post information on a public forum, it is foolish to expect that Google won't find it!

And the point you so widely missed was - what have his location or interests to do with the subject of the post?

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Originally Posted by buckbee

And the point you so widely missed was - what have his location or interests to do with the subject of the post?

Gee, if you are a beekeeper, you should understand that LOCATION is everything when it comes to keeping bees! Why do you think every Beesource post shows location information for the member making the post? Maybe because location is relevant?

Note that I did not re-post any other information from Borderbeeman's original post on Biobees. I simply posted his location, as he publicly and voluntarily posted!

Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

Thank you Borderbeeman for the post, as you stated in the 4 methods, they seem to bee people here on beesourse, whom I've never heard of before questioning the information, usually that means you hit out of the park, baseball term, for people from across the pond.

I find it facinating when someone post info on here, which are standard tactics for many organizations, some come out questioning and saying "fear mongering" no I just see it as info to help disimination the stuff people do.